The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-02-19

than the low priced
A--No. sir. Three times we have had butter that
would have been rejected by health officer. once
saw maggots in the butter. was told of another
time but did not them. The -four in the last yesr
has been better. Previous to the last year we had
great deal of very low grade -four. The baker called
attention to it. It was sour and nnusty. In the
ingrooms attention called to the dress goods as
old faded or shopworn or not up to sample.
Odd D. p Erwin g. Co. sell any of these goodsi
A-Yes, sir they did
The witness said that he had frequently said
to the storekeeper that things should be sent
back, but they were not sent back. The matron
OF the sewing room had condemned goods a. an
MT for the wearing apparel Of the patients. The /
witness was asked why he did not remove Mr..
Hall. He said he would have done so If he =
could. Mr. Hall was drunk few times. Had
he removed him it would have created an I'M
pleasant feeling with the trustees, and Hail. and
the rest of them. Besides Hall had plenty of
assistants to do his work in the most efficient
manner. To keep him in the place nominaly
made little difference. as there were plenty Of
persons to do his work.
Queston-Why did you not exercise your power to
Answer-I was not informed that had it in nv
power to interfere in the least until week ago Up
to that time the board had treated all that peraned to
the business and financial management belonging to
them and that they had sole control there while had
control in the medical department.
Odd you regard Hall as x1it person to be at the
head of that department.!
A;;-No sir. There are many removals would have :
made bad not known it would BIO extremely offensive
missed them. was not unhanpered
Q.-Who interfered with r,urchases?
A.-The trustees. have known goods brought out
there, which were condemned by Mr. Roth and or-s
dered off the place. that kent and paid for--Mr
and perhaps another house. In the matter of butter
it was received at the order of DR.. Harrison. The
butter was from John E. Sullivan in one nstance; at
another from Mr. Krauss of Columbia City.
Q.-Mr. Gapen accepted groceriesa
A.-Yes, and ordered Kreitein g. Schraders goods
received when had protested against it.
Q.-Is Gapens a relative of d. r. Erwin!
:. Ale was of Mr.. Gouding who was in that estab.
lishment.
Odd you see Mr.. Gouldng around the hos
A-Yes, sir do not know how frequently saw
Offended because goods were not received. He had
been referred by Mr.. Roth to me-
Q.-What do you know of the purchase of cabbage
at three cents poundf
THAT was 50. They bought by Mr. Hail.
Q-What would that amount to per head!
Al think of the cabbage would bring about
30 cents head: 1t was bargained for by contract
made by Hall with Mr.. Krauss. the Same who
furnished the butter
Q.-What was the fact as to D. P. Erwin &c Co.
getting contracts before Gouldng went down there to
work?
Al do not remember of any contracts before
that.
Q.-Where did Goulding work before going there!
A.-With some firm in Cincinnati.
Q.-Did the Cincinnati firm get any contracts!
Al believe
Q.-Why was Roth's salary reduced9
Al do not know
Q..Why was it put up at the time this investigation
Al don't know.
Q.-Had John E. Sullivan anything to do with help
of the Brown bill -
Al do not know it as fact.
An extract taken from letter written In Oc-
tober, 1883. by Superintendent Fletcher to DR..
Harrison, here introduced. It contained
the following significant paragraph:
There several applications for situations which
might be well for you to consider Senator johnson
asks place for his father, Senator Mcintosh for
os,, c1,lxv
tendant, as vacancies do not exist at this time.
The witness testified to the defacing of records
kept in Mr.. Halls Office. They were imperfect
ly kept There were many erasures and leaves
had been cut out Of the journal
| tention of the board to that state of facts.
| He narrated tho annulling of butter and egg
contract with Howard Duffy, of Columb1s, who
was furnishing good articles, and giving the con-
| tract to John e. Sullivan, to whom the board
/ paid almost twice the price. The witness spoke
/ Of the interference of trustees with the disci-
pline of employees MIR. Gapen would take the
liberty of censuring employees or of giving special
orders to them without the knowledge of the
superintendent DR.. Harrison did not do so
much Of this, but would talk with them and give
them promises OF promotion and say that
things ought to 60 on differently. which caused
| a state Of antagoEism in the institution. It the
| superintendent would order thing, perhaps the
employee would say Mr.. Gapen had ordered it
| otherwise. The witness said his desire was to
live in peace with the trustees, and he had made
| suggestions to them so that they might under
stand that they had control of a special depart
| ment. He found this Intellectual
There was some suppressed merriment over
point in the witnesses testimony. DR. Fletcher
| WAS asked about whose idea it was that found
| place in a suggestion be made In one OF his res
| ports to the board that woman be placed
| with a man-that liz, husband and wife-in
charge OF a ward In the male department as
| good thing, the presence of woman being con-
| ducive to order and good behavior. 1t appears
| that DR.. Harrison, in his testimony, had rather
obtruded the inference that it was his idea. Dr.
Fletcher said he had got the idea from an instt-
| tuition at Norristown, which rather plucked DR..
| Harrison's borrowed feathers.
| The investigation was again taken up at 1880
| o'clock last evening. James Orrel, who took
service at the hospital in August, 1884, and left
the first week in October, 1885, testified to hav-
| ing seen hogs dead of cholera in pens whore
other hogs that had been killed were being
| dressed He had been hostler, and testified to
there being bad feed.corn ard oats-of which ne
| had complained to Mr.. Hail. He understood
| from Hall that a carload of the specially bad
| corn'had been bought by DR.. Harrison.
DR.. Fleschers examination was resumed.
Question-In the sale of barrels by Mr.. Perkins for
$685. that money was turned over to Mr.. Hail. Was
| Answer never heard of the transaction.
| Q.-Are you familiar with the Mellen transaction?
Al have heard it discussed.
Mellen & Co.. New York, furnished curlea hair
| for upholstsring purposes. Their voucher was
| allowed in full It is claimed that Mr.. Gspen got
| discount of $64, which he never turned over.
OIL understand from Mr.. Gapen, In his testimony
/ that he received that money and handed it to yous
Al am positive that is not true. If he gave the
| money to me, he got receipt for It.
/ Q.-Did you receive any money from him under
! such circumstances!
/ Al am not aware of having received pc ny from
| Mr.. Gapen for anything
Q.-Do you know of any hogs bought Of Landsrs
| for the asylums
| Al understand 50.
| Q.-What was their appearance when deliveredl
A.-They were fat aud large. We wished small
| hogs. They were fat and ready to kill.
/ Q.=Wara they well or diseased